Originally Posted by scottwww
What is of much greater importance than this in regard to Obama's birth: Did Obama become an Indonesian citizen? Did he lose his U.S. citizenship at that time? When did he regain U.S. citizenship? Is this a disqualifier for the term "natural born Citizen"?
And another angle: As Barack Obama's father was a British subject, is one U.S. citizen parent enough to establish "natural born Citizen" status for a child who is even born on U.S. soil? And what about Ann Dunham possibly not having been old enough to have had her citizenship and the location of birth together fully trump the nature of citizenship that would partly come down from the father?
Why can't you realize that people get frustrated with you, because you keep asking the same questions and making the same statements, over and over again, while ignoring the answers which have been provided.
It has been established probably 20 or 30 times in this forum that a child does not lose citizenship by living in another country - this whole train of discussion is moot. Further, it was never a secret that Obama's father was not a US citizen, yet you act as if you are revealing something that hasn't yet been considered.
As far as the birth certificate, the logical explanation is that it's real, and that's the end of it. There's a big difference between "healthy scepticism" and being pigheaded. You're latching onto this image analysis conspiracy, while giving no consideration to the fact that Obama's 1961 birth was announced in two Hawaiian newspapers, and the validity of his birth records was certified by the republican governor of Hawaii.
But the real question is why you and others waste your lives discussing this meaningless topic. All legal challenges on this issue have been struck down long ago. Meanwhile, the 2012 republican field is pathetic, and with your "principle" of voting for minor candidates, you are not taking measures towards getting someone else into office (which is fine by me).